So I love soccer, watch soccer, enjoy soccer, but I'm definitely not at the point where I can understand nuances in the game so maybe you guys can help me understand better... What is the difference between 2016 Argentina that destroyed us 4-0 and 2009 Spain who we beat 2-0 in a knockout round? I mean I know the Spain result was a fluke, we likely had no business beating them. But regardless of the actual result, we hung with Spain who hadn’t lost in like 3 years prior to that. And this despite doing the typical American hang back and attack on the counter, which is what we have done against good teams for years and still do. But in this game, we didn't belong on the same field as Argentina. So is it.... A) Spain result was the flukiest fluke ever, we should have been creamed, Spain wasn’t taking us seriously, etc B) We are less talented (or at least less cohesive as a team) than the 2009 Confed team C) Wood, Jones and Bedoya suspensions made a big difference D) This Argentina team is so much better than that Spain team E) This result was flukiest fluke ever F) The style of football that Argentina played is less likely to result in fluky results like the Spain game. G) Something else?